due process, terrorism, crime, statutory revisions
“When we sit in judgment we are holding ourselves out as people—as the kind of a community—that are worthy of this task. It is the seriousness, the gravity, of the act of judgment which gives rise to our legitimate and laudable emphasis on procedural fairness and substantive accuracy in criminal procedure. But these things focus on the defendant—the one judged. I am concerned about us who would presume to sit in judgment. Who are we that we should do this? Whether we intend to do so or not, we answer this question in part through the way we conduct our trials.”
Daniel N. Clay,
Protecting Due Process During Terrorism Adjudications: Redefining "Crimes Against Humanity" and Eliminating the Doctrine of Complimentary Jurisdiction in Favor of the International Criminal Court,
71 Ark. L. Rev.
Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/alr/vol71/iss3/1